Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 19:57:22 GMT
Subject: M-G: FOR A LIST OF MARXIST RE-AFFIRMATION


FOR A LIST OF MARXIST-REAFFIRMATION


>Yes, it's true.  I have returned, having received an early parole from
>Louis G (who announced the end of my suspension on m-gen).
> 
>> No,  Jerry,  no one is "blaming" you for anything.
>
>Thank you, Louis. I see the above as a complete vindication of my actions.
> 
>> The suspensions are over.   
>> Have at it.
>
>Well ... I prefer to not "have at it."  Although I could send many posts
>responding to the slurs, accusations, and distortions of the last week
>(and note, in passing, that the flames got worse *after* my suspension,
>e.g the unscrupulous attacks on Paul W, Utica R, and Alan W), I prefer
>a fresh beginning. Consequently, I will take the high road and will let
>others continue on the low road ... but, of course, I reserve the
>right to respond to additional accusations and distortions.
>
>There's no place like home!
>
>Jerry


It is evident that the moderators of M-I continue to irresponsibly pile
iniquity upon iniquity in order to avoid assuming the consequences of their
unprincipled actions.

What are these consequences?  That the provocateurs want now to appear to
back down from their previous attitude of "cleaning M-I of "stalinists" and
even talk of "taking the high road" whatever that may mean from the mouth of
well-known prevaricators.

However my charges that M-I has turned into a barefaced "red-baiting pit"
under the present moderators' regime (one in which politically charged
decisions are taken on "visceral feelings", without the slightest democratic
consultation or seeking of consensus), still remain - and are in fact
re-inforced by the "lifting of suspensions" as undertaken by Godena - i.e
caving in before the provocations.  Moreover, Godena says an obviously false
thing as quoted crowingly by Levy (if the following is indeed a quote from
Godena, since from a known counter-feiter such as Levy, all is possible):

> No,  Jerry,  no one is "blaming" you for anything.

That is a demonstratively false sop, and he knows it and we most extrenously
protest it on our part. The communists and many other subscribers of M-I do
fully blame Levy and moreover are totally convinced that his "good
intentions from here onwards" are a complete sham likely to last only to
take a brief respite to let people forget what his objectives really are. 

As far as the moderators are concerned I will only note that there is no
question that when an unprincipled action has been committed another
unprincipled action to reverse it is not the solution but will only end up
compounding the initial mistake. Such are the wages of opportunism!.

In my understanding - as well as evidently too in the understanding of quite
a few other principled comrades - M-I is not a venue that deserves the
theoretical contributions of communists.  There is absolutely no point in
deniying this fact and we do not intend to submit any more contributions of
this sort to the list as it stands.

We think that the only valid contribution we can make now without sinking
into an unprincipled position is to raise consciousness of the state of
affairs in this list and to put our proposals for a way forward and win
public opinion among sincere people for these:

Considering that:

There is ONLY one single point of agreement between us and the
anti-communist sects and their representatives in the M-I list:  That we
cannot possibly co-exist here without and all out struggle. 

For both sectors to pretend otherwise would be unprincipled, and we admit
and proclaim it openly and clearly. On the other hand, these people, judging
by Levy's "good intentions mailer", are already acting hypocritically now
and want to cover up again their deeply held position and dissemble on this
point simply in order to have another go at provocations after a "decent"
interval.  

We will not be fooled and if anyone would believe them more fools themselves
or they themselves may have ulterior motives for wanting the situation to
continue to be so.

Here is what Jerry Levy wrote in possibly his only moment of lucidity:

"These divisions will not go away with a wish and a prayer. They
will not go away if we hide our heads in the sands of cyberspace. Had the
Stalinists been politically isolated on the list, then I would say that we
could move on to other subjects. Since they have not been, what's the
point? If we can't build some consensus over this question, then the
discussion of virtually all other subjects will degenerate as well."

Has he revised himself from this position, the very raison de etre for the
very existance of an honest to goodness Trotskyst sectarian?  Fat chance!
That is his bottom line position and therefore the identical reverse one
ought to be ours in all honesty too.  Moreover, he is not alone in holding
that point of view:

Here there are two other Trotskyst sectarian congratulating each other a few
days ago and expressing the very same point of view:

>And this is precisely why CONFRONTING stalinism today, yesterday, and
>tomorrow is so important for the Marxist left, if it is ever to succeed.

>
>A great post, Shane.
>
>Paul Zarembka

And this position is also the expressed position of Rodwell's, Bedgood's,
Shane, too, and no doubt even a few others including the innefable malecki.

It was the Trotskyst sectarians who at the dissolution of Marxism 1 - a list
which came to an inglorious end for very much the same reasons as this one
has come unstuck, and in which a number of incidents tailor made to obtain
bogus incriminating evidence to be used by the organs of repression of the
imperialist states against Committee Sol Peru and myself on the spurious
grounds of "issuing death threats" were made as it is registerd on the
record - attempted to group themselves in a so titled "Unity list" but they
promptly fell apart amid inter-sectarian quarrels and recriminations which
for a time were spilled over into M-I too. 

We hold that it is a demonstrable fact that these people can only subsume
their own dogmatic differences for five minutes in order to carry out
provative activities against the communists and revolutionaries. Of this
fact we are deeply convinced and we challenge to prove us wrong. (In that
pure Trotskyst list - "stalinists" were banned outright, which did not stop
them collapsing their own list amid mutual accussations of "stalinism"
against each other).

I therefore propose that like-minded comrades should begin and develop
further a campaign to raise consciousness of these facts among the users of
M-I and other lists who would want to rally around a genuine list of unity
among the revolutionary minded people.  That too - by definition and for
very much the same reason alleged by Levy in his lucid moments - must be a
list in which counter-revolutionaries are excluded outright.

There is nothing sectarian in this position.  There are many hues and
tendencies and points of view among those wanting to re-affirm and not
negate Marxism and the overall positive character of the revolutionary
experiences of the International Communist and Workers Movement, the
Anti-Imperialist National Liberation Struggles, and the wide democratic and
anti-fascist struggles too, as well as among those determined to practice a
principled internationalist solidarity with such struggles thus serving for
the advancement of the struggles of the proletariat and the oppressed masses
all over the world in that capacity. That qualification should make both for
a lively and at the same time comradely list.  Neither M1 or M-I in its
present condition can provide any assurances in this regard now or in the
future.

Whether M-I can itself be turned into that kind of list will depend of the
immediate re-structuring of this list and the appointment of a new
moderators panel untainted by the consequences of their own unprincipled
actions which have resulted in their complete loss of authority to do
anything positive to resolve these root problems.  Something even more
clearly exemplified by their caving in before the main culprit for the
provocative incident resulting from upsetting Zeynept's "visceral reactions".  

In any case, whether a new list or a reestructuring by agreement (i.e the
gentlemen Trotskyst sectarians would agree to vacate this list and go back
to their original "Unity list", another version of Marxism 2, or maybe a
totally new list too or whatever, and thus permit this reestructing to
proceed unhindered as they should if they are to honour their stated
positions and act for once in consequence with their most deeply held
beliefs, or we should then be allowed and backed in our quest to set up a
completely new list in this domain) the proposals I am submitting are thus
open to discussion:

The list (or new list) rules will obviously have to be changed (or
established) from rules pandering to bourgeois concepts such as "The
absolute right to life", "bourgeois feminism" and "political correctness" of
the "new-left type", into rules reflecting Marxist principle:

No agent provocateur activities allowed.  No red-baiting. No reactionary
Voice of America style "critical positions" need apply however intensely red
these may be painted with. The purpose of this list should be to advance
Marxist knowledge not to waste time rebating standard imperialist propaganda
available in all the bourgeois media outlets without exception. 

The standard for language in regards to race, colour, creed, and gender,
should be those that demonstratively correspond to standard popular speech
or higher, including academic level, and at the same time accord with
Marxist principle.  

The moderators shall not proceed to expulsions or suspensions of approved
subscribers without a general debate of the charges and without taking on
board a expression of the general feeling.  No more moderators acting on
"visceral impulses".

Initial subscription rights to be vetted by a panel of moderators appointed
by consensus among those participating in the list re-structuring and
moderator's welcome to the list should only be the responsibility of such
moderators. This means that if a person subscribes its first postings are
vetted by the moderators using the established criteria above before being
allowed into the list proper on probation for a set period. Once a
subscriber achieves the grade of approved subscriber, he will enjoy a full
right to hearing against any measure the moderators may decide to apply
against him/her.  Subscribers are free to be subscribers in any other list
they choose without limitations and no one should be discriminated on this
account.

In other words, our opponents are taken at their word, and I propose that we
declare this an open but separate contest between their proposals for
socialism and ours, and may the best win the day.  To fight each other in
concentric circles there is plenty of space in Marxism General and other lists. 

If what they say is true and they really believe it to be so and in the
interest of "moving on to other subjects" (i.e advancing knowledge):

"These divisions will not go away with a wish and a prayer. They
will not go away if we hide our heads in the sands of cyberspace. Had the
Stalinists been politically isolated on the list, then I would say that we
could move on to other subjects. Since they have not been, what's the
point? If we can't build some consensus over this question, then the
discussion of virtually all other subjects will degenerate as well"

- Jerry Levy (Feb, 1997)


can only be proven in practice, and likewise for us. 

Adolfo Olaechea


     




     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---